Soh Soh Soh.
Carlus
Currently. Without center or anchor of an experience-er experiencing. Floating almost is what it feels like. Unattached. Unbounded. Without tether. Just perfect.
Carlus
Woke up 2 days ago and it’s been like this. It is like waking up empty.
Carlus
No extremes.
Always already have been so. In seeing just the seen is what is always already the case, never has there been a seer, an experiencer or a center. In hearing always already only sound, never has there been a hearer behind or even a hearing besides sound.
Yes yes. Always already so.
So no matter the experience. It is always broken down through the Bahiya Sutta. The sense of. The subtle trail.
Yes. At some point it becomes absolutely clear there never was a seer or seeing or subject or center or watcher or hearing besides sound and colors and scents and sensations and thoughts.. all are vivid luminosity which is the manifestion appearing in dependence on conditions, self arising and self knowing
Then like a rope that is clearly realized without doubt to have never been a snake will never be mistaken to be a snake again, awareness will never be mistaken to be a subject again and self-appearances will never be mistaken to be objects
When it is clearly realised seeing is only ever just colors without seer and hearing ever just sounds without hearer, then there can be clear realisation and irreversible doubtlessness
The release of self/Self must be thorough without trace accompanied by clear wisdom or insight
I c. This has always been the practice.
Carlus
Again, so all the experiences, no matter how vast and beautiful are to be put aside.
Carlus
This morning felt like I was going to burst into particles of infinite love
Carlus
Just overwhelming beautiful perfection of this moment as I was driving to work.
Yes not to chase after experiences but rather sever the center through deep insight
Yes. That is known instinctively. To not grasp or chase. To not make it a view to chase.
Just like you dont chase after the vision of rope, but rather sever the illusion of snake by challenging and investigating until the illusion that there ever was a snake was completely dispelled without a trace of doubt
https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=39248
Ted Biringer wrote:
"In sum, sudden awakening simply refers to the realization of what we are and have been all along. It is the essential first step to authentic Zen practice. Sit down and direct your attention [i]from[/i] what you are aware of [i]to[/i] the very essence of awareness itself - this mind is Buddha."
Soh replied:
I agree it is an important first step. But it is not the last and it is not what the Buddha came here to teach. Otherwise he would not be here -- the Vedas and Upanishads would have sufficed, and he would not have left his two Samkhya teachers.
First Mind is Buddha.
Then Seeing Form is Apprehending Mind, Hearing Sound is Realizing Dao. (见色明心,闻声悟道)
Then the realization of No Mind, No Buddha.
That is getting to Ma Tzu and Bodhidharma's message (especially his text The Doctrine of No Mind https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-doctrine-of-no-mind-by-bodhidharma.html ), and Hui-Neng's and Dogen's 'Impermanence is Buddha-Nature'.
Ted wrote:
"To recognize that objects of mind (phenomena, forms, dharmas) arise and cease endlessly, while mind itself neither arises nor ceases is not to deny the reality (Buddha-nature) of such objects – just the opposite in fact. It is, in truth, the very coming and going of all transient forms that allows us to awaken to that which is ever and always free from coming and going"
Soh replied:
What you are describing is the Shrenika false view of eternalism which Dogen refuted.
http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=H6A674nlkVEC&pg=PA21&lpg=PA21
From Bendowa, by Zen Master Dogen
Question Ten:
Some have said: Do not concern yourself about birth-and-death. There is a way to promptly rid yourself of birth-and-death. It is by grasping the reason for the eternal immutability of the 'mind-nature.' The gist of it is this: although once the body is born it proceeds inevitably to death, the mind-nature never perishes. Once you can realize that the mind-nature, which does not transmigrate in birth-and-death, exists in your own body, you make it your fundamental nature. Hence the body, being only a temporary form, dies here and is reborn there without end, yet the mind is immutable, unchanging throughout past, present, and future. To know this is to be free from birth-and-death. By realizing this truth, you put a final end to the transmigratory cycle in which you have been turning. When your body dies, you enter the ocean of the original nature. When you return to your origin in this ocean, you become endowed with the wondrous virtue of the Buddha-patriarchs. But even if you are able to grasp this in your present life, because your present physical existence embodies erroneous karma from prior lives, you are not the same as the sages.
"Those who fail to grasp this truth are destined to turn forever in the cycle of birth-and-death. What is necessary, then, is simply to know without delay the meaning of the mind-nature's immutability. What can you expect to gain from idling your entire life away in purposeless sitting?"
What do you think of this statement? Is it essentially in accord with the Way of the Buddhas and patriarchs?
Answer 10:
You have just expounded the view of the Senika heresy. It is certainly not the Buddha Dharma.
According to this heresy, there is in the body a spiritual intelligence. As occasions arise this intelligence readily discriminates likes and dislikes and pros and cons, feels pain and irritation, and experiences suffering and pleasure - it is all owing to this spiritual intelligence. But when the body perishes, this spiritual intelligence separates from the body and is reborn in another place. While it seems to perish here, it has life elsewhere, and thus is immutable and imperishable. Such is the standpoint of the Senika heresy.
But to learn this view and try to pass it off as the Buddha Dharma is more foolish than clutching a piece of broken roof tile supposing it to be a golden jewel. Nothing could compare with such a foolish, lamentable delusion. Hui-chung of the T'ang dynasty warned strongly against it. Is it not senseless to take this false view - that the mind abides and the form perishes - and equate it to the wondrous Dharma of the Buddhas; to think, while thus creating the fundamental cause of birth-and-death, that you are freed from birth-and-death? How deplorable! Just know it for a false, non-Buddhist view, and do not lend a ear to it.
I am compelled by the nature of the matter, and more by a sense of compassion, to try to deliver you from this false view. You must know that the Buddha Dharma preaches as a matter of course that body and mind are one and the same, that the essence and the form are not two. This is understood both in India and in China, so there can be no doubt about it. Need I add that the Buddhist doctrine of immutability teaches that all things are immutable, without any differentiation between body and mind. The Buddhist teaching of mutability states that all things are mutable, without any differentiation between essence and form. In view of this, how can anyone state that the body perishes and the mind abides? It would be contrary to the true Dharma.
Beyond this, you must also come to fully realize that birth-and-death is in and of itself nirvana. Buddhism never speaks of nirvana apart from birth-and-death. Indeed, when someone thinks that the mind, apart from the body, is immutable, not only does he mistake it for Buddha-wisdom, which is free from birth-and-death, but the very mind that makes such a discrimination is not immutable, is in fact even then turning in birth-and-death. A hopeless situation, is it not?
You should ponder this deeply: since the Buddha Dharma has always maintained the oneness of body and mind, why, if the body is born and perishes, would the mind alone, separated from the body, not be born and die as well? If at one time body and mind were one, and at another time not one, the preaching of the Buddha would be empty and untrue. Moreover, in thinking that birth-and-death is something we should turn from, you make the mistake of rejecting the Buddha Dharma itself. You must guard against such thinking.
Understand that what Buddhists call the Buddhist doctrine of the mind-nature, the great and universal aspect encompassing all phenomena, embraces the entire universe, without differentiating between essence and form, or concerning itself with birth or death. There is nothing - enlightenment and nirvana included - that is not the mind-nature. All dharmas, the "myriad forms dense and close" of the universe - are alike in being this one Mind. All are included without exception. All those dharmas, which serves as "gates" or entrances to the Way, are the same as one Mind. For a Buddhist to preach that there is no disparity between these dharma-gates indicates that he understands the mind-nature.
In this one Dharma [one Mind], how could there be any differentiate between body and mind, any separation of birth-and-death and nirvana? We are all originally children of the Buddha, we should not listen to madmen who spout non-Buddhist views.
------------------
- Reply
- 19m
- Reply
- 12m
- Edited
- Reply
- 1m
- Reply
- 1m
- Edited
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 1m
7 Comments
Yin Ling
Awareness of awareness is so tiring and quite contrived. I wonder why ppl keep teaching this. Easier to hold on to a god.
Soh Wei Yu
Yes more for realizing the first phase. Problem is when people think it is ultimate and final.
As John Tan said before:
“Awareness
aware of itself soon becomes dead...lol. The measure of one's depth is
in the ineffability and marvelous manifestation in activity. Anatta and
emptiness cannot be dead.” – John Tan, 2013
2009:
(12:58 AM) Thusness: there is no essential nature
(12:58 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:58 AM) Thusness: when we say 'Self', it is learnt
(12:59 AM) Thusness: we say permanent, unchanging...it is just an abstraction
there is luminosity but it is empty
(12:59 AM) AEN: icic..
(1:00 AM) Thusness: what is meant by Awareness watching Awareness?
(1:00 AM) Thusness: it is for the beginner to first discard discursive thoughts and direct realized what Awareness is like.
it is just a first glimpse
(1:01 AM) Thusness: when we see that and think that we can rest in awareness, we are deluded.
(1:01 AM) Thusness: awareness always manifests
(1:01 AM) AEN: we cannot rest in awareness?
(1:01 AM) Thusness: there is nothing to rest
what is there to rest
(1:02 AM) AEN: oic
(1:02 AM) Thusness: true resting is the practice of vipassana
is to open to whatever is
(1:03 AM) Thusness: Awareness watching Awareness is for the Realisation
not for the development
(1:03 AM) Thusness: once realized, there is nothing to watch
(1:03 AM) AEN: icic..
(1:04 AM) Thusness: anything further is mistaking a stage as Realisation
all is empty.
(1:05 AM) Thusness: a meditator meditating into absorption is also empty.
if attached, he will be equally confused.
(1:05 AM) Thusness: just like a flower, where is the redness?
only dependently originates
(1:06 AM) Thusness: if u are attached, when in other realms, u still seek for flower, then u will be confused.
(1:06 AM) Thusness: still seek for redness
when without the body, what is the experience of absorption?
(1:06 AM) Thusness: is it still the same?
(1:07 AM) Thusness: is there any absorption that is inherently 'there'
get it?
(1:07 AM) AEN: ic..
btw absorption can be sustained without body rite
(1:08 AM) Thusness: it depends
it is the mind state
(1:08 AM) Thusness: what sort of tendencies
if it is strong enough, yes.
(1:09
AM) Thusness: if u have emptiness realisation and is strong enough, u
will also see whatever in whatever state, realize emptiness.
(1:10 AM) Thusness: there is no difference.
(1:11
AM) Thusness: for example with the experience of "I AM", just sound,
though completely different phenomena, it is immediately understood as
"I AM:
get it?
(1:11 AM) Thusness: it depends on the degree and intensity of the realization.
I see "I AM" everywhere.
(1:12 AM) Thusness: means non-dual
i see sound as I AM.
I see taste...etc
(1:12 AM) Thusness: then I AM is deem unnecessary
(1:13 AM) Thusness: that path the base for the next stage.
I am not more bothered by "I AM"
(1:13 AM) Thusness: just like 1 to 12 timetable
(1:13 AM) Thusness: once mastered, u r no more bothered by it.
(1:14 AM) Thusness: u can make use of it to understand more complex mathematics
(1:14 AM) AEN: oic..
(1:14 AM) Thusness: then u c DO
again till u see DO everywhere
(1:14 AM) Thusness: then u progress to spontaneous perfection
get it?
(1:15 AM) AEN: ic..
Yin Ling
Soh Wei Yu
true lah. It’s inevitable I think, to go through the awareness phase. I
can’t see how one can jump to anatta straight, maybe super wisdom haha.
Soh Wei Yu
Yin Ling yes an important realisation. Otherwise might have to do reverse insights later:
Soh Wei Yu
Anatta and Pure Presence
Someone told me about having been through insights of no self and then progressing to a realisation of the ground of being.
I replied:
Hi ____
Thanks for the sharing.
This
is the I AM realization. Had that realisation after contemplating
Before birth, who am I? For two years. It’s an important realization.
Many people had insights into certain aspects of no self, impersonality,
and “dry non dual experience” without doubtless realization of
Presence. Therefore I AM realisation is a progression for them.
Similarly
in Zen, asking who am I is to directly experience presence. How about
asking a koan of what is the cup? What is the chirping bird, the thunder
clap? What is its purpose?
When
I talked about anatta, it is a direct insight of Presence and
recognizing what we called background presence, is in the forms and
colours, sounds and sensations, clean and pure. Authentication is be
authenticated by all things. Also there is no presence other than that.
What we call background is really just an image of foreground Presence,
even when Presence is assuming its subtle formless all pervasiveness.
However
due to ignorance, we have a very inherent and dual view, if we do see
through the nature of presence, the mind continues to be influenced by
dualistic and inherent tendencies. Many teach to overcome it through
mere non conceptuality but this is highly misleading.
Thusness also wrote:
The
anatta I realized is quite unique. It is not just a realization of
no-self. But it must first have an intuitive insight of Presence.
Otherwise will have to reverse the phases of insights
Labels: Anatta, Luminosity |
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Anatta and Pure Presence
Soh Wei Yu
(1:15 AM) Thusness: u must understand that Eternal Witness is a Realization
(1:16 AM) Thusness: u must understand that anatta is also a realisation
(1:16 AM) Thusness: one may experience non-dual but insight need not arise...this is what i always emphasized.
emptiness is also a realization
spontaneous perfection is also a realisation
(1:17 AM) Thusness: all these requires a quantum leap in perception
(1:18 AM) Thusness: then these realization will gradually burns away those latent deep tendencies.
get it?
(1:18 AM) AEN: oic..
(1:18 AM) Thusness: i got to go now.
(1:18 AM) AEN: ok
nite
(1:22 AM) Thusness is now Offline
(1:26 AM) Thusness: By the way, don't always argue
(1:27 AM) AEN: lol
(1:27 AM) Thusness: when u want to lead, it must be gradual.
(1:27 AM) AEN: icic
(1:27 AM) Thusness: nobody can understand at one go.
(1:28 AM) Thusness: if i straight away tell u from day one spontaneous arising, u will run away
or think that i m mad
instead it took 6-7 years
(1:28 AM) Thusness: similarly when in dharmaoverground, i first talk about "I M"
(1:29 AM) AEN: lol
oic
(1:29 AM) Thusness: and even until One Mind, there is already problem
(1:30 AM) Thusness: u don't go talk here and there about no need to do this and all is already perfected
kok ur head
u know all already perfected ah
(1:31 AM) AEN: oic.. lol
(1:32 AM) AEN: btw my post got problem? u mean i wrote about all perfected?
(1:32 AM) Thusness: for ur own practice it is okie but with guidance
(1:33 AM) Thusness: for writing post in forum, it is better to stress the essenceless nature of awareness
(1:33 AM) Thusness: because when there is no one to guide, it is easy to fall into the advaita understanding
(1:34 AM) AEN: oic..
(1:35 AM) Thusness: for u, ur theoretical understanding runs ahead of ur experience
u already understand non-dual
(1:35 AM) Thusness: but u r now experiencing dual awareness
(1:36 AM) Thusness: means u experience awareness but distinctly different from phenomena arising
(1:37 AM) Thusness: so it is okie to continue experience this Awareness, it voidness, its clarity, its luminosity, its presence
as vivid as possible
till u have "I AM" sort of experience
(1:37 AM) Thusness: then u proceed to non-dual
(1:38 AM) Thusness: in fact up to a certain phase, i will tell u to do bodily sensation
(1:39 AM) AEN: back
oic..
- Reply
- 12m
Soh Wei Yu
<-- John Tan wrote this one year before I broke through to I AM and then anatta
Reply
Those who can read Chinese should read through the two pdfs/documents. You can use phone read to text to read for you (that's what I do when I am driving, etc).
Here's the link to my compilation of Zen Master Hong Wen Liang: https://app.box.com/s/ceb9i7wsk0lkfl2sjex97ai56l1k52pf
I really like his teachings. As John tan said, "There r too many insightful pointers, really worth reading it multiple times. Teacher Hong Wen Liang is 89 years old this year, glad u treasure his articles. Difficult to find a teacher with such intimacy with one's empty clarity. "
- Reply
- 4h
- Edited
- Reply
- 4h
- Reply
- 3h
- Edited
- Reply
- 3h
- Reply
- 3h
- Edited
- Reply
- 3h
- Edited
- Reply
- 3h
- Reply
- 3h
- Edited
- Reply
- 2h
- Reply
- 32m
- Reply
- 32m
- Reply
- 27m
- Reply
- 27m
- (ChatGPT translation: 那么这么样子‘显’是什么道理?
So, what is the principle of "manifestation"?
小蜡烛点了,点起来的火焰是不是小点?
When a small candle is lit, isn't the flame small?
我拿一个大的蜡烛点了,这个火焰会不会再大点?
If I light a larger candle, will the flame be larger?
我拿个大木头把他烧成火焰,一团火。
If I burn a large piece of wood, there is a big fire.
火统统都是一样的火,小蜡烛小,大蜡烛大,大火柴呢,就大火聚,每一个人每一个人都是像火一样的显。
All fires are the same fire, small candles are small, large candles are large, and large matches are large fires; every person manifests like fire.
我小火,朱老大火,我笨一点,朱老聪明一点,我丑一点,朱老呢是帅一点。
I'm a small fire, Zhu is a big fire, I'm a bit foolish, Zhu is smarter, I'm uglier, and Zhu is more handsome.
火焰的那个材料,蜡烛的材料,跟那个点的那个样子,每一个材料跟那个遇缘显得那个样子个个不一样这样显,其实统统都是火焰的样子。
The material of the flame, the material of the candle, and the appearance of the ignition, each material displays a different appearance based on the encountered conditions, but in reality, they are all appearances of the flame.
木头墙壁天空,太阳地球星星,都是这个整个看不见摸不到的那个法性海,给他摩擦了才会生火,没有摩擦那个木材会不会有火?
Wood, walls, sky, sun, earth, and stars are all this entire unseeable, untouchable ocean of Dharma Nature. Only with friction will fire be produced; without friction, would there be fire in the wood?
遇到缘就火出来了,火躲在哪里?
When the conditions are met, the fire comes out. Where is the fire hiding?
火躲在木材里吗?
Is the fire hiding in the wood?
没有。
No.
躲在那个fiction,动的那个,动的fiction(摩擦)那个里头吗?
Is it hiding in the fiction of motion, the fiction of friction?
动能里头有火吗?
Is there fire in kinetic energy?
在空气里头有火吗?
Is there fire in the air?
没有,氧是氧,它不是火焰,对不对?
No, oxygen is oxygen, it's not fire, right?
但是这些东西凑起来呢,我们讲缘起,释迦牟尼佛常常讲缘起,costa,缘起就这样火往南方跑,火到北方跑,火到净土,火到秽土,火到地狱,火到哪里去?
Fire runs to the south, fire runs to the north, fire goes to the Pure Land, fire goes to the Impure Land, fire goes to hell, where does the fire go?
所以,《金刚经》不是大家都讲吗,无所从来,这个火从哪里来?火躲在哪里跑出来,不知道,你去找火没有呀。这个火相的那个来源的种子看不见摸不见,但遍处,只要条件对了他就冒出来,不管欧洲美国大海上天空上,只要是缘对了,氧气够了,有材料了,摩擦他就出来了。你看,烧完了就火灭了,火灭了到哪里去,亦无所去。
So, isn't the Diamond Sutra always talking about it, coming from nowhere? Where does this fire come from? Where does the fire hide and run out, we don't know, have you looked for the fire? The source of the fire's appearance, the seed, is unseen and untouchable, but it is everywhere. As long as the conditions are right, it will emerge, no matter in Europe, America, on the ocean, or in the sky. As long as the cause is right, there is enough oxygen, and there are materials, it will come out with friction. You see, when it is burned out, the fire is extinguished, and when the fire is extinguished, where does it go? There is nowhere to go.
《金刚经》不是念嘛念嘛,那你各位都是相信《金刚经》,还是相信那个轮回的这个一时的方便的说法,你要死了的时候,那个西藏的慈祥,我在台湾讲了半天,讲了生死轮回讲了一百,讲了六十几场吧,在台湾六十几场,在台湾巡回演讲,头一次我讲生死,介绍西藏的生死学,后来他们就跟着讲了。
The Diamond Sutra is not just about reciting, so do you all believe in the Diamond Sutra, or do you believe in the temporary, expedient teachings (Soh: should be 'expedient expression of that specific instant') of reincarnation? When you are about to die, the Tibetan compassion, I talked about it in Taiwan for a long time, talked about the cycle of life and death a hundred times, about sixty-something lectures, sixty-something lectures in Taiwan, on a tour in Taiwan, the first time I talked about life and death, introduced the Tibetan life and death studies, and then they followed and talked about it.
好了,我就请问各位,你讲无所从来,就是像火啊,看到火吗,很简单的,打火机一打就出来,我说火从哪里来?打火机的油里头吗?油是油不是火嘛,那火石嘛?火石是火石啊,不是火焰啊。哪里来?你说没有空气氧气不行,但是氧气不是火呀,但是火在哪里,只要这些条件对了,他就升起来,懂吗?没有条件了它就消失了。
Alright, let me ask you all, when you say "coming from nowhere," it's like fire, right? You can see fire, it's simple, a lighter can produce it with a flick. Where does the fire come from? From the oil inside the lighter? Oil is oil, not fire, right? And the flint? Flint is flint, not the flame. Where does it come from? You say it can't exist without air, without oxygen, but oxygen isn't fire. However, where there is fire, as long as the conditions are right, it rises, understand? Without the conditions, it disappears.
所以说“我们的存在就是像火焰一样,缘对了,就显这个样子。”你大块头大木材烧的是大一点的火焰,小木材烧的是小小的火焰,小火焰,是这样而已,去也无所去,到哪里去,消失在何方,找不到,这个是我们的样子,这个发现是释迦牟尼佛的发现。
So, "Our existence is like a flame; when the conditions are right, it manifests in this way." A large piece of wood produces a larger flame, and a small piece of wood produces a smaller flame, just like that. There is nowhere to go, where does it go, where does it disappear, it can't be found, this is our nature, and this discovery is the Buddha Shakyamuni's discovery.
所以,他的与大地有情同时,大地有情同时成道,就是,原来统统是火焰,各种不一样的样子,有的显有的不显而已啊,都是一样的那个火,火的样子是各个不同,我现在悉达多我认到这个你们叫我佛,其实你们也是那个不同的火在那里烧,石头也是石头那样子烧,同时都是,都是法性海各个缘起不一样的显嘛,是这个意思。
Therefore, when he and all sentient beings on earth achieve enlightenment together, it means that everything was originally a flame with various different appearances. Some are visible, some are not, but they are all the same fire. The appearance of the fire is different for each. I am now Siddhartha, and you call me Buddha, but actually, you are also those different fires burning. Even stones burn like stones, and at the same time, they are all different manifestations of the ocean of Dharma Nature arising from different conditions, that's the meaning.
你这个不懂的话,奇怪,你成道了我们也就成道了,我跟你跟他分开来那么想佛法,这不是对不起他吗?他讲的话不是这个意思。
If you don't understand this, it's strange. If you achieve enlightenment, so do we. If I think of the Buddha's teachings separately from you and him, am I not letting him down? That's not what he meant.
好啦,时间可能也太久了,喉咙可能也要休息了,所以,怕大家坐久了再讲下去,讲到明天天亮还讲不完。因为道理是随便你讲,但是真正的东西每一位坐的太累了,脚麻了,有一点精神支持不了受不了,各个火焰不同的样子在那里燃烧,但是都是火焰,缘对了所以升起来而已,升起来有他的火焰这个东西吗?没有,没有自性,所以叫做诸法无我。
Alright, it's probably been too long, my throat might need a rest. So, I'm afraid if I keep talking, it won't end even when the sun rises tomorrow. Because the principle can be talked about casually, but the real thing is that everyone sitting here is too tired, their legs are numb, and they can't bear it with a little bit of mental support. Different flames burn in different ways, but they are all flames. They rise only because the conditions are right. When they rise, is there something like their own flame? No, there is no inherent nature, so it is called the non-self of all phenomena.
所以呢,缘尽了就没有,所以诸行无常,一定是无常。风吹了火就动,风停了就静一点,材料大一点油多了火焰大一点,有钱一下没有钱一下,生病一下好一下,长寿一点短寿一点,都是这个缘起的道理在那里,都是火焰。所以“一堆猛焰亘天红,”就是这个意思。
So, when the conditions are exhausted, it ceases to exist. Hence, all things are impermanent, and impermanence is certain. When the wind blows, the fire moves; when the wind stops, it becomes calmer. If the material is larger and the oil is more, the flame is bigger. Having money for a while, not having money for a while, being sick for a while, and recovering for a while, having a longer life or a shorter one, all of these are the principles of dependent origination, and they are all flames. So, "A heap of fierce flames stretches across the sky," that's the meaning.
从这里去了解,我与大地有情同时成道,你就了然于心,而且不会在自己身心上在那里搞鬼,弄神弄鬼,一天到晚给迷信骗掉了,或者是给人带错路。释迦牟尼佛讲,你本来就和我一样,每一个都是佛性遇缘显的不同,你不要抓住这个火焰的大小,去希望这个火焰永远燃烧,希望这个火焰永远大永远亮,那就是你那个缘已经是在那里,除非你能够处处不偏,处处不失去我们本来不是这个小我的存在,这个念不要偏离的话,那应该怎么烧就是怎么烧,应该怎么熄就怎么熄,不会说自己长一点不希望短一点,不会说希望不要,我要自杀,不会这么想,这是一个平常心是道的道理。
From understanding this, when I and all sentient beings on earth achieve enlightenment together, you will have clarity in your heart and will not engage in deceit or superstition, nor will you be misled or lead others astray. Buddha Shakyamuni said, you are originally just like me, each one is the manifestation of Buddha-nature encountering different conditions. You should not grasp onto the size of the flame, hoping for it to burn eternally or to be forever big and bright. That's because your conditions are already there. Unless you can be impartial everywhere, not losing our original selflessness (Soh: more accurately: original selfless existence), if your thoughts do not deviate, then you should let the flame burn as it should and extinguish as it should. You won't hope for a longer life or wish to end your life; you won't think this way. This is the principle of an ordinary mind, the Way. (Soh: should instead be "Ordinary Mind is the Way")) - Reply
- 8h
- Reply
- 8h
- Reply
- 7h
- Reply
- 7h
- Reply
- 7h
Soh Wei YuMaster hong:那么这么样子‘显’是什么道理?小蜡烛点了,点起来的火焰是不是小点?我拿一个大的蜡烛点了,这个火焰会不会再大点?我拿个大木头把他烧成火焰,一团火。火统统都是一样的火,小蜡烛小,大蜡烛大,大火柴呢,就大火聚,每一个人每一个人都是像火一样的显。我小火,朱老大火,我笨一点,朱老聪明一点,我丑一点,朱老呢是帅一点。火焰的那个材料,蜡烛的材料,跟那个点的那个样子,每一个材料跟那个遇缘显得那个样子个个不一样这样显,其实统统都是火焰的样子。木头墙壁天空,太阳地球星星,都是这个整个看不见摸不到的那个法性海,给他摩擦了才会生火,没有摩擦那个木材会不会有火?遇到缘就火出来了,火躲在哪里?火躲在木材里吗?没有。躲在那个fiction,动的那个,动的fiction(摩擦)那个里头吗?动能里头有火吗?在空气里头有火吗?没有,氧是氧,它不是火焰,对不对?但是这些东西凑起来呢,我们讲缘起,释迦牟尼佛常常讲缘起,costa,缘起就这样,你不能找到什么东西制造火焰,但是这些东西碰在一起的时候,optimal,optimal的costa,optimal的地点,它就有火出来。火是有光,有热噢,会烧噢,会有亮噢,但是没有出来以前,火躲在哪里?你去给我找火出来,能不能找到火?找不到啊。但是我们人知道啊,这样凑凑起来一弄一下,火柴也是这样发明的啊,对不对?那个火石,石头和石头相碰的火花出来,都知道这个道理,但是这个火花哪里出来,谁制造?不知道啊。这个火呢,看得见,有光有热,我们的身体,你的存在。聪明的笨的,老的少的,或者是健康的,有钱没有钱,火焰的样子不一样,但是这个不一样的各种样子是从哪里跑出来?谁也不知道。但是会跑出来,知道吗?所以我们的存在就像火焰一样,各个各个不同,佛也一样那样的火焰,我们也是这样的火焰。但是,从哪里跑出来,那个火性,火的原来的还没有变成火以前的那个种子呢,遍满,它没有形象,没有一个地方是他躲得,只要你这个缘对了,条件对了就跳出来,弥漫宇宙。所以说佛性遍满宇宙,普贤世界,普贤就是讲这个道理,我们用普贤讲大家就觉得,噢,普贤菩萨的行愿到处遍满法界。随时缘对了,condition对了,就有火焰出来,但是这个火变成火以前呢,火变成火的相以前呢,在哪里?找得到吗?找不到,大的呢,小的呢?重呢轻呢?什么行色呢?都没有。但是遇缘,就光热跑出来,那么缘呢,这一块木材把他烧完烧完烧完,这一块木材没有了,火要不要熄灭掉,火熄掉,缘尽,火就没有了,我们的缘没有了我们就当然是走啦,到哪里?火灭了火到哪里去,蜡烛烧了,火到哪里去?火往东方,火到西方走,火往南方跑,火到北方跑,火到净土,火到秽土,火到地狱,火到哪里去?所以,《金刚经》不是大家都讲吗,无所从来,这个火从哪里来?火躲在哪里跑出来,不知道,你去找火没有呀。这个火相的那个来源的种子看不见摸不见,但遍处,只要条件对了他就冒出来,不管欧洲美国大海上天空上,只要是缘对了,氧气够了,有材料了,摩擦他就出来了。你看,烧完了就火灭了,火灭了到哪里去,亦无所去。《金刚经》不是念嘛念嘛,那你各位都是相信《金刚经》,还是相信那个轮回的这个一时的方便的说法,你要死了的时候,那个西藏的慈祥,我在台湾讲了半天,讲了生死轮回讲了一百,讲了六十几场吧,在台湾六十几场,在台湾巡回演讲,头一次我讲生死,介绍西藏的生死学,后来他们就跟着讲了。好了,我就请问各位,你讲无所从来,就是像火啊,看到火吗,很简单的,打火机一打就出来,我说火从哪里来?打火机的油里头吗?油是油不是火嘛,那火石嘛?火石是火石啊,不是火焰啊。哪里来?你说没有空气氧气不行,但是氧气不是火呀,但是火在哪里,只要这些条件对了,他就升起来,懂吗?没有条件了它就消失了。所以说“我们的存在就是像火焰一样,缘对了,就显这个样子。”你大块头大木材烧的是大一点的火焰,小木材烧的是小小的火焰,小火焰,是这样而已,去也无所去,到哪里去,消失在何方,找不到,这个是我们的样子,这个发现是释迦牟尼佛的发现。所以,他的与大地有情同时,大地有情同时成道,就是,原来统统是火焰,各种不一样的样子,有的显有的不显而已啊,都是一样的那个火,火的样子是各个不同,我现在悉达多我认到这个你们叫我佛,其实你们也是那个不同的火在那里烧,石头也是石头那样子烧,同时都是,都是法性海各个缘起不一样的显嘛,是这个意思。你这个不懂的话,奇怪,你成道了我们也就成道了,我跟你跟他分开来那么想佛法,这不是对不起他吗?他讲的话不是这个意思。好啦,时间可能也太久了,喉咙可能也要休息了,所以,怕大家坐久了再讲下去,讲到明天天亮还讲不完。因为道理是随便你讲,但是真正的东西每一位坐的太累了,脚麻了,有一点精神支持不了受不了,各个火焰不同的样子在那里燃烧,但是都是火焰,缘对了所以升起来而已,升起来有他的火焰这个东西吗?没有,没有自性,所以叫做诸法无我。所以呢,缘尽了就没有,所以诸行无常,一定是无常。风吹了火就动,风停了就静一点,材料大一点油多了火焰大一点,有钱一下没有钱一下,生病一下好一下,长寿一点短寿一点,都是这个缘起的道理在那里,都是火焰。所以“一堆猛焰亘天红,”就是这个意思。从这里去了解,我与大地有情同时成道,你就了然于心,而且不会在自己身心上在那里搞鬼,弄神弄鬼,一天到晚给迷信骗掉了,或者是给人带错路。释迦牟尼佛讲,你本来就和我一样,每一个都是佛性遇缘显的不同,你不要抓住这个火焰的大小,去希望这个火焰永远燃烧,希望这个火焰永远大永远亮,那就是你那个缘已经是在那里,除非你能够处处不偏,处处不失去我们本来不是这个小我的存在,这个念不要偏离的话,那应该怎么烧就是怎么烧,应该怎么熄就怎么熄,不会说自己长一点不希望短一点,不会说希望不要,我要自杀,不会这么想,这是一个平常心是道的道理。Yin LingSoh Wei Yu oh this is very good.This is like MMK cause and condition. If MmK speak like that I probably will have less headacheYin LingSoh Wei Yu where did you find this? This is not in the document you compile right ?Soh Wei YuYin Ling it is in the second document. The zip file has twoYin LingSoh Wei Yu oic! What a treat, gonna check it out thanks!- Reply
- 5h
- Reply
- 5h
Another Very very good teaching no time to translate but gist is: The whole world is none other than your innate clarity. There is no other. There is no separate you.
Our own innate clarity is this boundless empty presence. Any realized teacher should be pointing you to this, if not, it’s psycho talking to psycho (I’m just translating)
父母未生前
好,再讲一点,平常用功的人仔细听哦,就晓得这个,有一点影子了。就自己打坐,非常自在。有声
音,好象现在外面有⻋子的声音。声音进来,这样如如地响,不管你想听不想听,有了就显,没有了就消失了,那么安祥,对不对!
如果你起一个念头“哎,声音”。这是你起的认识作用,对不对!这个认识的作用未起以前,有没有声 音在?我讲“在”啊!不是说你认到、你听到。有没有先有声音“在”,presence。你认到了这个,然后说I hear, 我听到。过去式 I heard。认到你才能讲。认到声音以前有没有跟境界一起动?你能听的跟所听到 的声音,本来没有分别啊!整个法界就是那样的动啊!法界的动哎!法性的作用本身,依照法性的作用 那样作用,上你的认识吗?有的时候打坐,暂时会到这个境界去,暂时离开人天之界,讲这个意思,懂 吗?很细哟。平常不用功的话那就当理论听,没有用嘛!听进来就抓住这个理,拼命那么想。因为平常 不打坐,所以听这些话根本没有用。
好了,认识未起以前,有法性的作用,依法性的作用那样子动,对不对?但是你还没有起认识。那么 刹那之间你还没有起认识的时候,暂时把你带到人天之外的境界去。很可惜很可惜,在这个时候,虽然 有亲验这个境界喔,亲验到,自己都莫名其妙,到底什么事都不知道。哎...就在这里,怎么一回事,你 都不知道。所以呢,一下子又掉进“识”的境界里去。
真正懂得药山禅师说明的非思,文殊讲的不依也不依,佛正传的佛法的修行方法的人,总是会暂时 一下一时,在打坐中会离开人天的世界,离开人天,到别的境界。有没有经验过?有,谁都有,尤其是 常常打坐的人,这个经验比普通人可能还要深刻一点。可惜没有人指导,呆呆的坐,只能坐的久。平常 遇到这个你还不懂得什么事情,好可惜的事哎!不晓得什么东⻄,不知道到底是怎么一回事。所以一下 子,又⻢上回到这个“识”的境界里去。
所以当你碰到好的老师,不管出家、在家,他有过这个经验,他讲起这一层,这里面的事,哎,比别 人理解得更清楚。啊,他会知道!他会知道!!但是这样经验过的老师几乎没有,会听懂的用功的学生 也很难找到。大家都是意⻅批评意⻅,乱成一堆,“臣⻅臣”。希望有一天,在座的各位,去“君⻅臣” 去,呱呱乱讲的师父是“臣”。你这个东⻄是很清楚的,有了就有了,非常清楚的。因为是你自己真正的 面目啊!自己最清楚啊!绝对是不动摇,哪里会动摇?这个才是佛法。不管别人怎么讲,不管讲什么什 么道理,你都不会被骗掉。因为你发现真正的 real self。注意啊,这个self。你想把这个身心弄干净,烦 恼扫除掉了,就变成 real self,啊,那又听错了,我讲的话就全白费了。
燃烧的比喻
要把这个real self ... 我再用比方,注意我是用的比方哦!当你看到前面一朵红色的玫瑰花的时候,你 这个 real self啊,整个燃烧成那一朵红色的玫瑰花,懂吗?⻅到对面的红色玫瑰花,这是你真正的自己 燃烧成那一朵红色的玫瑰花呀!有没有灰?有没有烧成灰?没有!你把眼睛转到别的地方,看到一块馒 头,你的real self ,自性、真正的自己,它无形无相,没有固定的相哦!它⻢上燃烧成一个白色馒头。 整个白色的一块馒头就是你的 real self ,烧成那个样子现。刚刚的红色玫瑰花呢?痕迹都没有,消失在 何方?找也找不到,佛也找不到,也不用你除。现在看到的一块白色馒头,馒头是你的自性燃烧,全 身、通身燃烧成那一个白色馒头。仰头,仰天一看夜空的星星,现在馒头呢?烧完了,立刻消失,也没 有留下灰。远处天空里的一颗星,当时就变成你自性燃烧成的那颗星。普通一般的禅师就会说:“你乱 讲,那颗星本来你不看的时候就挂在天边呐!怎么你转到去看了,你才烧成那个?难道你不去看的话那 颗星就不在吗?”一般是不是会这么说?这就是人的思维,这就是妄想颠倒。那一颗星星没有映现在你 身心上,对你还有什么意义?所以不管遇到什么缘,看到的、听到的、摸到的、想道的,一接触,缘 起,那个缘就变成你自性,本身就是那个缘。所以我们的存在是绝对的存在,不受时空约束、没有限 ,懂得吗?怎么去证明?那个样子就是“只管打坐”了,哪有什么道理!
罗医师慈悲啊,说让我讲讲坐的一点要领。我说以前的道友听过好几次了,耳朵都听烂了,只是屁股 没有坐好。我说好了好了,为了新参加的朋友,多谈谈这些。不要留住,不要记住,这个道理请各位记 住的。时常留意你的身心,像一团火一样,燃烧、发光、发热,遇到什么缘,那个缘就是你自性烧成那 个,轰、轰、轰,无间断。That’s all.
我常讲,觉性圆明无相身,于是就把觉性看做精神,精神的东⻄。这完全是你读错了,想错了。觉性圆明的意思就是,它会变成云,也变成石头。也变成爱,也变成恨。也变成虚空,也变成时间,所以叫做觉性圆明。它没有固定的是什么样的东⻄,所谓精神和物质是人自己分的,那是一个妄想的境界,是
概念。有生命没有生命也是概念,我们不知道。所以死掉了,有人以为没有生命了,吓死了。为什么?
你总是用我们那个识神,也就是我们叫阿赖耶识,由阿赖耶识去了解佛法,了解生死,所以当然是怕
生、怕死。有的人怕生所以自杀,这也是莫名其妙。
正确的闻思修
所以这个“闻思修”很要啊!闻,要闻正法,而且,要听得很正确,不要误解,不要加自己的意⻅。 所以这个时候就很要,跟过来人,跟老师,真正有证的人,互相谈话,听他说的话,彼此交换。你 把你的情况,现在的心,现在的样子,跟他说,他会根据每个人不同的样子会讲不同的话,这样子能够 修正自己的⻅解。闻,要正闻,所以要跟法师啊、师父啊,真正有证的哦!不要去做什么“臣⻅臣” 啊,神经病去找神经病,谈来谈去谈一大堆佛法。那就是精神病病人找精神病病人,互相在那里,以为 是在治疗。但有的时候很奇怪,有一种情况是,你已经彻⻅本性了,你已经知道你自己整个是光明所现 成的,你本身就是光明的本身在燃烧,你已经彻⻅这个事情,我们说“明心⻅性”已经做到了。但是,你 找的师父呢?他还是糊里糊涂,虽然是穿袈裟,很有名望,但是他还是整个阿赖耶识在那里动。这样的 情况临济祖师是怎么讲的,君⻅臣。正常的人去请教一个精神病人,跟一个精神病人说话就是君⻅臣。 一般最多是“臣⻅臣”,精神病跟精神病在那里乱讲话,彼此乱说话,彼此恭维,彼此互骂。最好是什么 呢?过来人看到过来人。哦,“君⻅君”,正常的人看到正常的人。
闻思修很要紧,要听正法,不要听邪法。可是在学的时候不知道哪个是正法,哪个是邪法?问题出在
这里!听了正法,碰到正师。所谓正师,真正的老师是什么呢?不是一定出家,也不是一定在家,都不
是,也不一定是有名望,很多人供养,有很大的庙子。呵,那不是正师。所谓正师,就是告诉你,你本
来是光明体,你本来就是光明的脱体现成。告诉你,这样的老师就是正师。其他的,迎合很多人的阿赖
耶识所希望的、所想避免的,教这些方法的那不是,那都是增加你阿赖耶识的这种趋向。这样教的话,每个学生的阿赖耶识势必越来越强,还得了!
闻,思,然后修呢?盘腿上座是闻思之后最好的修行方法!这个叫释迦牟尼正传的“只管打坐”。只管 打坐的意思不要弄错了哦!一直讲不要用你的阿赖耶识。阿赖耶识是什么?我们认为我们的心能够认识 这个,知道这个,说这个红的、白的、好的、不好的、漂亮的、丑的、物质的、精神的,在那里分的那 个,有这个认识能力的,就是我们平常讲的“攀缘心”,这个叫阿赖耶识,对不对!或叫识神,中国人讲 识神。如果一直抱着这个东⻄学法的话,你所学的都是阿赖耶识里跑出来的东⻄。比方说,如果你要洗 澡,拿了很脏的水,你要洗干净你的身体,怎么洗?越洗越脏。为什么?因为都用阿赖耶识这个脏的 水。阿赖耶识在求法,在求真理,求真相,就会这个样子。
所以只管打坐,你认为“我坐在这里,什么都不想,什么都不动。我在这里,听是听,看是看,坐就 是坐,我呢要这样做。”这个是不是只管打坐?很容易误会,以为只管打坐就是...你说,“seeing is seeing, hearing is hearing, sitting is sitting,整个宇宙跟整个宇宙打交道。你讲的嘛!好,我就这样坐。” 对不对呀?这个不叫只管打坐。这个叫什么?你又把佛传的只管打坐的真义呀,用你的阿赖耶识把它接 受,把它了解,说我要这样坐,“光打坐就好了,坐就是坐!”你看,这么一动,你的阿赖耶识动了,这 哪里是只管打坐呢?只管打坐是你不动阿赖耶识。告诉你,你本来就是光明体,光明体在那里燃烧。所 以,光明体本身在那里显现。就这样子,就是叫做只管打坐。谁叫你只管坐,不要做什么,不要做这 个,不要做那个。唉,阿赖耶识又开始动,又开始去背这个 sitting is sitting, seeing is seeing, hearing is hearing。只管打坐又被误会掉了。
不是告诉各位,各位本来就是光明体吗?你的体性是光明嘛!光明是借用的两个字哦!不是光暗的光 哦!无形无相,随缘什么就变成什么,用光明借用。那么你在那里呼吸了,心脏动了,知道声音了,知 道痛了麻啊,是光明在那里燃烧的样子嘛!不是你去燃烧的,它那个样子燃烧嘛!其实想什么它也是那 里燃烧啊!那拼命说只管打坐,好,我来只管打坐!早就听错了话。所以闻思修的“闻思”都做不好!老 师也不行。你去看一看,假如你彻⻅本性了,你去找一找这样讲的老师,那么是“君⻅臣”啊!老师是 “臣”。
弄清楚了吗?只管打坐,千万不要误会掉!曹洞宗的这么好的指导,“只管打坐”,把它当作“我只管 打坐就好了,不要念咒,不要安那般那,不要观想,这样坐就对了。”老早就不对了!谁叫你这样坐? 洞山禅师没有这样讲的。你本来是光明嘛!所以光明的一片,就这样显现就对了。等于说你不要求这 个,不要息心,不要停止什么东⻄,都不要,不要也不要,那就是什么?本来你就是光明一片。耳朵自 然有声音,就一起在那里响,眼睛看到有相,不管你坐不坐。你坐在那里打坐,有人走过,你的影子 现,眼睛是半开半闭的嘛!所以,眼睛对色相,耳朵对声音,这是讲什么意思呢?讲你的真正的本性, 你的“真正的你”,你的本性在燃烧的样子。这就叫,耳对声音,眼对色相,描写燃烧的样子,参同契里 是这么讲的。
不用求真 唯须息⻅
我再打一个比方,帮助大家打坐,不要弄错。好,你说没有能所,看前面一朵花。花是被我看⻅,但 是,你说本来的情况是没有能所,花上面没有能看所看在上头。你用功的时候,所有一切,看了,听 了,声音里头,相里头,都没有能所。“哎,你看,我都不动思想。⻅到了一个东⻄,就现。听到了一 个声音,就响。嗯,我停在这里就对了。”请问各位,这样用功,是不是还用你的阿赖耶识在那里用 功?只不过是禅师所讲的,真正的光明动的那个样子。他讲他的光明在那里动,在那里燃烧。你去把它 转成你的意⻅,用你的阿赖耶识去接受它,然后说,“我们看,我们听。其实看的、听的,我砰一下, 嗨,看到一朵花,哎,都是没有能所的,我就维持这个境界。”呵,你还不是拿你的阿赖耶识在那里拨 弄。这样用功对吗?都是掉进这个陷阱里头去了。听到的什么东⻄都转换成识神的境界。那不要转换, 不要转换,本来就对了嘛!所以这个叫“声音就是声音,听就是听”就是讲的这个意思。你不要又转成, “声音本来就是声音,色相本来就是色相,上头没有能所,都是这光明一片燃烧的啊!”你把光明的燃烧 变成你的识神的莫名其妙。懂得用功吗?
所以,僧璨讲“不用求真”哪!不要说怎么样才是光明燃烧的样子。你本来就是光明在那里燃烧,大地 一团火嘛!本来是燃烧的样子,你不要加进识神的作用就对了。“不用求真,唯须息⻅”,停止你的识神 乱七八糟的参与,就对了嘛!我们这样子上座用功就是只管打坐。
这样还不懂得你所想的自己根本不存在,这样还不懂吗?还不会确证吗?没有一个你所想象的你在那 里动啊!动的是一片光明,一段光明,是随着缘变成你这个样子。这是妙观察智是这样。所以并不是你 那个身心有智慧了,你普通的意识活动变成佛一样的妙观察智。不是这个意思的妙观察智,不是在你身 心上的分别意识,变成好了,变成跟佛一样了,妙观察智不是这样。那个变成妙观察智不是还有你身心 这个个体吗?不是矛盾吗?所以转识成智大家统统误会为,“我本来是分别意识(第六意识是分别意 识)在动,现在我修成就了,我的分别意识变成妙观察智。”“你”有没有在那里?你以为“你”的分别意 识变成妙观察智,那真莫名其妙,哪有这样的佛法?那念佛学的人就那么想。所谓妙观察智并不是发生 在你所妄想的身心上,分别意识转成那个样子,你具有这个妙观察智。那你具有这个妙观察智的话,还 要那个假的你在那里?所以妙观察智的意思绝对不是这个样子。是什么样子?狗是狗,猫是猫,人是 人,天使是天使,恶⻤是恶⻤,那是妙观察智“现”的,随缘现的这个。本体,我们的光明燃烧的样子, 燃烧成狗,燃烧成神,燃烧成佛,燃烧成人,燃烧成这个样子,随因缘,所以各种不同的状况出现。燃 烧的样子,这个叫做妙观察智。不是你的分别意识变成聪明一点,能变成佛一样的妙观察智。所有东⻄ 都可以看做无自性的,还有一个“你”看所有东⻄没有自性,那这个是妙观察智吗?唯识学,乱讲。
转成妙观察智它真正的意思就是,已经没有虚妄的、那个你认错的“你”的分别意识它变成聪明一点, 妙观察智是告诉你整个的光明的、燃烧的活动的样子。好了,这个不要弄错就对了!千万不要把“只管 打坐”听错了,拼命在那里“我来只管打坐”——“你”来只管打坐?!
(Soh: here's ChatGPT translation, I have not verified its accuracy:
Before parents are born
Alright, let's talk a bit more. Those who usually work hard, listen carefully, and you will understand this: there is a bit of a shadow. You meditate on your own, feeling very comfortable. There are sounds, like the sound of a car outside now. The sound comes in, resonating steadily. Whether you want to hear it or not, it appears when present and disappears when it's gone. It's so peaceful, right? If you have a thought like "Ah, sound." This is your recognition function, right? Before this recognition function arises, is there a sound? I say "yes"! It's not about whether you recognize it or hear it. Is there a presence of sound first? You recognize it, then say I hear, I heard. You can only speak when you recognize it. Before you recognize the sound, does it move together with the realm? The sound you can hear and the sound heard are originally indistinguishable! (Soh: should be this instead - the hearer and the sound being heard are originally indistinguishable) The entire Dharma realm moves like that! The movement of the Dharma realm! The function of Dharma nature itself, acting according to the function of Dharma nature, does it rely on your recognition? Sometimes when meditating, you will temporarily enter this realm, temporarily leaving the realm of humans and gods. Do you understand? It's very subtle. If you don't usually work hard, then just listen to the theory; it's useless! Just grasp the principle and think hard. Because you don't usually meditate, listening to these words is basically useless.
Alright, before recognition arises, there is the function of Dharma nature, moving according to the function of Dharma nature, right? But you haven't recognized it yet. In that instant, when you haven't recognized it, you are temporarily taken to a realm beyond humans and gods. It's such a pity that at this time, although you have personally experienced this realm, you are utterly baffled and have no idea what's going on. Ah... it's right here, but you have no idea what's going on. So, in an instant, you fall back into the realm of "consciousness."
Those who truly understand the teachings of Master Yao Shan on non-thinking, the non-reliance and non-abiding taught by Manjusri, and the practice methods of the Buddha's orthodox teachings will always temporarily leave the world of humans and gods during meditation, entering other realms. Have you experienced it? Yes, everyone has, especially those who meditate often. Their experiences may be deeper than those of ordinary people. It's a pity that no one guides them; they just sit there blankly, only able to sit for a long time. Normally, when you encounter this, you still don't understand what's going on. What a pity! You don't know what's happening, and you have no idea what's going on. So in an instant, you return to the realm of "consciousness" once more.
So when you encounter a good teacher, whether they are monastic or lay, they have had this experience. When they speak of this level and the matters within, they understand more clearly than others. Ah, they will know! They will know!! But it's almost impossible to find such experienced teachers, and it's difficult to find diligent students who can understand. Everyone is just criticizing opinions, making a mess of things, like "ministerial views." I hope that one day, those in the audience will move beyond "ministerial views." A noisy teacher is a "minister." You are very clear about this; once you have it, you have it, very clear. Because it is your true face! You know yourself best! It's absolutely unshakable, where would it waver? This is the Dharma. No matter what others say, no matter what kind of reasoning they use, you won't be deceived. Because you have found your true, real self. Pay attention, this self. You want to cleanse this body and mind, sweep away afflictions, and become the real self. Ah, if you misunderstand again, my words would have been in vain.
The metaphor of burning
To make this real self... Let me use a metaphor, be careful, I'm using a metaphor! When you see a red rose in front of you, your real self, the whole, burns into that red rose, understand? When you see the red rose across from you, that's your true self burning into that red rose! Is there any ash? Is it burnt to ash? No! When you shift your eyes elsewhere and see a piece of bread, your real self, true nature, and true self are formless and have no fixed appearance! It instantly burns into a white piece of bread. The entire white piece of bread is your real self, burned into that form. What about the red rose just now? There's no trace of it, vanished without a trace. Now, when you see the white piece of bread, the bread is the result of your true nature burning, your entire body and mind burning into that white piece of bread. Look up at the stars in the night sky, where is the bread now? It's burned and vanished without a trace. A star in the distant sky becomes your true nature burning into that star. An ordinary Zen master would say, "You're talking nonsense, that star was already hanging in the sky when you weren't looking! How come when you turned to look, you burned into it? If you don't look, would that star not exist?" Isn't that what people usually say? This is human thinking, this is delusion and confusion. If that star doesn't manifest in your body and mind, what significance does it have to you? So, no matter what conditions you encounter, what you see, hear, touch, or think, as soon as you make contact, conditions arise, and that condition becomes your true nature, which is itself that condition. So our existence is an absolute existence, not subject to the constraints of time and space, without limits. Understand? How to prove it? That state is "just sitting," and there's no reasoning behind it!
Dr. Luo is compassionate, asking me to talk about some tips for sitting. I said that my old friends have heard it several times before, and their ears are worn out, but their buttocks haven't sat well. I said, fine, for the sake of new friends, let's talk more about these. Don't hold on, don't remember, please remember this principle. Always pay attention to your body and mind, like a ball of fire, burning, emitting light, emitting heat, encountering any condition, that condition becomes your true nature burning into it, boom, boom, boom, without interruption. That's all.
I often say that the awakened nature is the formless body of perfect illumination, so people think of it as something spiritual. This is completely wrong, a misunderstanding. The meaning of perfect illumination is that it can become clouds, and it can become stones.
It can also become love, and it can become hate. It can become emptiness, and it can become time. So, it is called the awakened nature of perfect illumination. It has no fixed form or appearance. The so-called spiritual and material are distinctions made by humans themselves, which is a realm of illusion, a concept. The concepts of having life or not having life are also something we don't know. So when someone dies, people think there is no life left, and they are terrified. Why?
You always use our cognitive spirit, which we call alaya consciousness, to understand Buddhism and life and death. So, of course, you are afraid of life and death. Some people are so afraid of life that they commit suicide, which is also inexplicable.)
1 Comments
John Tan
Yin Ling
yes. Even in the first point of "父母未生前” is already so good. Usually
the koan should be "before ur parent gave birth to u, who r u", but the
emphasis is not "who r u", instead the emphasis and pointing is "before
birth" (未生) then direct pointing to the "sound". This directly points
to anatta and freedom from all elaborations.
Then
he creatively points to effortless spontaneity and natural perfection
when he emphasized in last sentence of the first point
"注意啊,这个self。你想把这个身心弄干净,烦 恼扫除掉了,就变成 real self,啊,那又听错了,我讲的话就全白费了."
John Tan
Yin Ling first point imo there r 3:
1.
Presence as "sound". No 2 parts of "presence" and "sound". No two
parts of "I" and "sound". Just sound. This is what he meant by:
你能听的跟所听到 的声音,本来没有分别啊! No "能听的" and "所听到的" these 2 parts.
2. He is also point to what is meant by "before birth" means "original", "primodial".
3. He is pointing to natural perfection and effortless spontaneity in his last sentence of first point:
注意啊,这个self。你想把这个身心弄干净,烦 恼扫除掉了,就变成 real self,啊,那又听错了,我讲的话就全白费了.
Here
he is saying, caution: if u even attempt to "cleanse" this body-mind,
to eliminate "annoyance", then u have turned this teaching into "real
self" and wasted all my explanations.
John Tan
Yin Ling
for his second point: 燃烧的比喻, that is total exertion. Also "no birth or
unborn or unmade" nature of suchness. If u link his point 1 and 2, u r
essentially moving from 未生 "before birth" to 无生 "no birth" (不垢不净,不増不减).
He is essentially trying to trigger the experiential taste directly
instead of analytically unlike mmk.
Mr. TJ
I
used to wonder about "before birth, who am I" as a pointer, because of
the Theravada practice where you actually trace awareness before your
birth into your previous lives. The version "Before mother and father
were born who am I?" which is even more puzzling - what do mother and
father have to do with anything? But I recently saw the explanation that
mother and father are metaphors for yin and yang, that is, the world of
manifestation. So it means prior to manifestation who am I,
primordially as you put it John.
Mr. TJ
Just some basic stuff, nothing like the advanced realizations you two are discussing.
André A. Pais
If
this is really good stuff, it would be auspicious to create some type
of translation group for these teachings. It's important to dissiminate
profound and pure teachings coming from contemporary authentic teachers,
even if it's just a few articles o…
See more
Yin Ling
André A. Pais
I was thinking to try, but because my realizations is very superficial
and these of a master is very deep, plus my Chinese is .. rudimentary at
best .. I could easily mislead. Maybe in a few years if I progress well
- Reply
- 4h
- Reply
- 12m
- Reply
- 11m
- Reply
- 10m
Adam Holt
It
may be a minor point, but conceptually when saying that the world is
‘one’s own clarity’ there is some danger of someone understanding this
to be solipsism.
‘You’
are also basically a manifestation of the clarity of mind, so it’s not
really ‘yours’ in the sense of being within your faulty identity.
Like
in a dream, you might identify as being a prince. It’s not that the
dream is the prince’s dream exactly as much as the whole thing including
the prince is a manifestation of the dream.
This
is relevant for yidam practice as well, because we come to understand
that it’s not that the yidam is part of ‘our’ mind in the sense of being
a subset of our conceptual identification, as much as both the yidam
and our current identification are both manifestations of the mind at
large, and the yidam is basically a broader manifestation than our
current identification is.